On Saturday, August 26, 2017 at 6:40:53 PM UTC-4, wjhonson wrote: > On Saturday, August 26, 2017 at 2:42:51 PM UTC-7, Andrew Lancaster wrote: > > On Saturday, August 26, 2017 at 7:57:21 PM UTC+2, wjhonson wrote: > > > > > My point is that the YDNA is useless without the autosomal to show that you are even on the right track or even in the right galaxy. > > > > > > Imagine all that work put in, even for moderators of some Y groups, and then finally they test their sister or first cousin or uncle and find out they are not even related to them > > > > I can not parse this point. It looks like a apples and pears logic. All kinds of tools can help a genealogists and help confirm each other, but that does not mean any of them are necessarily useless on their own. > > Here is how you parse it Andrew. > Your father is not your father. Or is he? > The Y tells you nothing on this point at all. > Sure you might match some people they might even have your surname > But it tells you nothing about which line you are in, since lines can pass on, completely unmutated for four generations. > > Maybe you're really the second cousin of who you think you are > > Autosomal DNA however does not lie on points like this I assume you could also be an interdimensional being only made to look like human, but chances are... I do recommend the autosomal tests also. I even treated my mother to one from 23andme a couple years ago for Christmas. The bonus medical information from that site in particular is quite nice. Concerning Y DNA results I think Scottish clans have contributed significantly to that field. Take a look at projects like the Gordons, Hamiltons or MacDonalds who have so many tested individuals with a documented pedigree connecting them to one another they can essentially tell a testee who lacks a documented genealogy which branch of the family they belong to. What is learned, like mutation rates, from such documented families who are tested allow for deductions on families not so well documented. Not everything in science happens right before your eyes, but it is based on logical deductions.

On Sunday, August 27, 2017 at 2:00:16 AM UTC+2, Katherine Kennedy wrote: > I do recommend the autosomal tests also. I even treated my mother to one from 23andme a couple years ago for Christmas. The bonus medical information from that site in particular is quite nice. I think no one is denying that the current types of autosomal testing can be useful for some types of genealogical questions, (especially for people in well-tested populations), but for NON-MEDIEVAL, recent, genealogy. Concerning the weaknesses of Y DNA in studying RECENT generations, for example the hypothetical case of a man being son of his father's brother, cousin, or whatever, I think that this is covered by my previous comment that all types of evidence in genealogy can sometimes be helped, if needed, by cross checking with other types of evidence. But again, no one is denying that autosomal DNA is useful for recent generations. I do not think paternity testing is the main aim of genetic genealogy in most cases though.